Tennessee--Rutgers ending--Women's Game

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Gimlet25id

I realize what you are saying...but if a player can't catch and shoot with .3 left after a dead ball what makes you think the player can catch an shoot with .2. My point is that more then likly she wouldn't have got the ball off in time. Time is time, in the replay she is clearly holding the ball with .2.

What rule would you use to dis-allow the basket?

[Gimlet25id]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

What rule would you use to dis-allow the basket?

Again I didn't say by rule that you would automatically disallow the basket. I said more then likely in this play the basket wouldn't have been good. The TP is holding the ball on the floor with .2 on the clock. Either way if there wasn't a foul they would've been required by rule to go to the monitor if the basket was good in this play to either count or cancel.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Gimlet25id

Again I didn't say by rule that you would automatically disallow the basket. I said more then likely in this play the basket wouldn't have been good. The TP is holding the ball on the floor with .2 on the clock. Either way if there wasn't a foul they would've been required by rule to go to the monitor if the basket was good in this play to either count or cancel.

I agree, they should check the monitor. But they would not be looking at whether the player is still holding the ball at 0.2, they would check to see if the ball was "clearly in flight" at 0.0. Whether the player is holding the ball at 0.2 is completely irrelevent from the review.

[Gimlet25id]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

I agree, they should check the monitor. But they would not be looking at whether the player is still holding the ball at 0.2, they would check to see if the ball was "clearly in flight" at 0.0. Whether the player is holding the ball at 0.2 is completely irrelevent from the review.

Dude....I know! I didn't say that they would be looking to see if the player was holding the ball. They would like, you said, be checking to see if it was in flight before 000's on the clock.

My point was that its just unlikly that if she is holding the ball on the floor with .2 that she's not getting the ball off before triple 000's. Thats all and nothing more.

[Gimlet25id]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

I agree, they should check the monitor. But they would not be looking at whether the player is still holding the ball at 0.2, they would check to see if the ball was "clearly in flight" at 0.0. Whether the player is holding the ball at 0.2 is completely irrelevent from the review.

Its not a matter if they should but by rule they MUST.

[Blue37]

Sorry I am late getting into the discussion but I do not have cable and just heard about the ending. I am not a basketball official but read the board regularly and have been intrigued by the discussions regarding timing errors in NFHS games. Assume this had been a NFHS game. Are there any remedies?

Change the time line slightly. Assume the ball goes out-of-bounds with five seconds. It is inbounded and the official verifies the clock started appropriately. The ball is passed and a shot goes up. It misses and the ball is tipped a couple of times, then rebounded and a shot is made as the horn sounds. The losing (visiting) coach alleges the clock stopped. The timer admits he twitched and accidentally hit the off switch but turned it back on immediately. Any remedies in this situation? What if the timer said it had been off for a couple of seconds? What if an official had been counting just in case of a malfunction? How accurate does the official's count need to be? If the official hit five just before the shot, should he trust his timing and wave off the basket?

Thanks for educating a fan!

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Gimlet25id

Dude....I know! I didn't say that they would be looking to see if the player was holding the ball. They would like, you said, be checking to see if it was in flight before 000's on the clock.

My point was that its just unlikly that if she is holding the ball on the floor with .2 that she's not getting the ball off before triple 000's. Thats all and nothing more.

Dude...ok!

I was just trying to clarify, because both you and Referee24.7 seemed to imply by rule the basket shouldn't count because the player was still holding it at 0.2. As it turns out, we agree.

Originally Posted by Gimlet25id

Its not a matter if they should but by rule they MUST.

Shall...should...must..., I think all these are pretty close to the same, and still different than may...possibly...perhaps...

[truerookie]

[quote=Gimlet25id] Those two officials are @ the top of the Women's game and have been on more big games then most. Therefore I have to believe that they had no idea that there was a timing error.

If the aforementioned is true, IMO, it should not have been a timing error at all!!

[Gimlet25id]

Originally Posted by truerookie

If the aforementioned is true, IMO, it should not have been a timing error at all!!

Your kidding right? I mean you've got to be joking! Are you saying that their not? How in the world can you say that the timing mistake is on them? Oh...wait a minute...I remember you think that "C's" sole responsibility is to make sure the running clock doesn't......

Originally Posted by truerookie

I disagree, it's the C responsibility to ensure things go properly with the clock.

(2). The point I'm trying to make is this. If the C was monitoring the clock and observed that the clock STARTED; STOPPED; STARTED; STOPPED again; then we have a foul he/she have definite knowledge that the game should be over before the foul occurred. Game over!!

So if "C" would've been doing what you suggested then maybe, just maybe they would've caught that the running clock stopped, started, then ran out. So while "C" is doing this then who is watching to see if the shot is good or not? While center is eyeballing the clock who is referring "C's" area?

It's a good thing then, from your above quote, that you don't have anything to do with who is/isn't @ the top!! IMO!

[truerookie]

Originally Posted by Gimlet25id

Your kidding right? I mean you've got to be joking! Are you saying that their not? How in the world can you say that the timing mistake is on them? Oh...wait a minute...I remember you think that "C's" sole responsibility is to make sure the running clock doesn't......



So if "C" would've been doing what you suggested then maybe, just maybe they would've caught that the running clock stopped, started, then ran out. So while "C" is doing this then who is watching to see if the shot is good or not? While center is eyeballing the clock who is referring "C's" area?

It's a good thing then, from your above quote, that you don't have anything to do with who is/isn't @ the top!! IMO!

Look Gim, is it ok if I call you Gim? Look we have both spoken and given our perspectives on the play. I'm moving on.

[johnSandlin]

I look at it this way, until any of us are in that situation, we can sit here until we are blue in the face, saying the officials could have done this and should have done this.

However, I say until we are put into that situation this officiating crew were involved with, we will never know or say for sure how will or should have handle the situation.

[rainmaker]

None of this argument about whether or not the shot should be allowed speaks to the issue of the clock "pausing" for a fairly long time at .2 seconds. It appears the refs either didn't know that this happened, didn't notice it in the replays, or didn't feel authorized to address it. I'd be interested in hearing whether there are rules in the NCAA set that speak to this particular issue.

[johnSandlin]

rainmaker,

Under NCAA Rule 2, Section 13, Articles 2 & 3. items 1-4 in art 2, and items A-C in art 3 deal and talk about what the officials can do when they use the replay monitor to what they can and cannot look for and rule on.

[Gimlet25id]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

None of this argument about whether or not the shot should be allowed speaks to the issue of the clock "pausing" for a fairly long time at .2 seconds. It appears the refs either didn't know that this happened, didn't notice it in the replays, or didn't feel authorized to address it. I'd be interested in hearing whether there are rules in the NCAA set that speak to this particular issue.

Somehow we got off on this side note of rather a held ball could count with .2 left. That really wasn't the original discussion. If you get the chance read back aways.

The NCAA rules do have provisions that would allow the officials to use the monitor and reconstruct the play while using a stop watch in timing error situations.

My contention all along like you hinted, is that they didn't know there was an error. If they didn't know they had a timing error then the "R" wouldn't have any reason to look for one in addition to the play he was asking for.

I would almost guarantee that this particular situation is going to initiate changes in the NCAA court side monitor procedures. For example maybe requiring that when you go to the monitor that you should look @ so much time before the play @ game speed while checking the in question play as well as timing issue's. Doing this before looking @ the play in question in a frame by frame mode.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by johnSandlin

I look at it this way, until any of us are in that situation, we can sit here until we are blue in the face, saying the officials could have done this and should have done this.

However, I say until we are put into that situation this officiating crew were involved with, we will never know or say for sure how will or should have handle the situation.

But there is value in considering what we would do in their place. What happens to the odd big dog or two on national television, is just as likely to happen to one or two of us at some point. And dissecting their mishaps may give us the leg up on them if it ever happens to us.